Thank you ever so much, adrianus. Yes, that is what I meant. I- and a friend - started trying to learn Latin on our own about a year ago. I started on some composition but I tired of North and Hillard filled with military stuff. So I decided to try my hand at translating the book of Genesis from the Hebrew. I do my translation and then compare it with the vulgate. This sentence is from Genesis 19-34. Jerome does frequently say, "dixit ad aliquem.."

Thank you ever so much for responding in both English and in Latin. It is an inspiration to me!

This phrase, "It came to pass," is (I think) generally agreed to be a Hebraism, since it is especially common in Greek and Latin versions of the Bible (and translations of them). Glancing through Luke 2 in the Vulgate, I see that factum est is usually followed by 1) some kind of temporal clause to give the setting, and then 2) a finite verb. Examples:

It would take a bit more study to see if this construction has many classical parallels (it probably occurs occasionally, but it's certainly not common), and whether or not an ut + subjunctive clause is normally used with it, and how it might be used elsewhere in the Vulgate.

True.... But don't you think these expressions in the Vulgate are something fundamentally different? It's almost like they serve a larger "discourse function" in the narrative, as in, moving the story forward to it's next major component.... And in the four examples I looked at (an admittedly small sample!), they seemed like little more than "place holders" for the setting element, holding you over until a real main verb comes. I'm pretty sure there is a Hebrew (or Aramaic) expression that this is directly imitating; but they're using the resources that already existed in Latin, but for different purposes (as your A&G examples show).

So, to GVR2 (the original poster): I suppose it depends on whether you want your translation to imitate the style of the Vulgate, or of Ciceronian Latin.

Genesis 11:1 in Hebrew starts out with the words, Vayahi, which is generally used to start a new narrative, especially a story. It is almost the equivalent of our “once upon a time.” Literally, it means “And there was.”

Plater & White, A Grammar of the Vulgate (1926), p.118 wrote:§134. (a) The Noun-Clause: (1) as Subject, attached to the main sentence by ut or quod. In English the Subject is expressed provisionally by "it" and the clause containing the logical Subject is introduced by "that". It follows Verbs used impersonally, as est, factum est, absit, accidit, paenitet, etc., and the Subordinate Verb is in the Subjunctive: thus "mihi pro minimo est ut a vobis iudicer" I Cor. 4.3, "manifestum...quod ex Iuda ortus sit Dominus" Hebr. 7.14, ..."factum est...ut intraret"...Lk.6.6

According to Plater & White, otherwise the construction is "Factum est et" ["Factum est...et ipse stabat" Lk.5.1] but the "et" is often dropped in the New Testament and the Verb is in the Indicative ("sometimes this arises from the Greek"), especially when a cum clause intervenes. (p.119)

According to Plater & White, otherwise the construction is "Factum est et" ["Factum est...et ipse stabat" Lk.5.1] but the "et" is often dropped in the New Testament and the Verb is in the Indicative ("sometimes this arises from the Greek"), especially when a cum clause intervenes. (p.119)

That part seems especially applicable....

Vayahi cum hoc legissem mihi persuasum est, et ecce surrexi et ... meum Vulgatum ipse scribere coepiAnd it came to pass that when I had read this I was persuaded, and behold I arose and ... began to write my own Vulgate!

Latin usually uses such phrases as 'evenit ut' or 'accidit ut' followed by the subjunctive for 'it came to pass' or 'it happened that'.

The only thing we can guarantee when communicating via the internet is that we will be almost completely misunderstood, and likely cause great offence in doing so. Throw in an attempt at humour and you insure a lifelong enemy will be made.

adrianus wrote:Where does the "early" come from and "It came to pass" (in St. James)? The Hebrew?

In Hebrew (I apologize for my transcription) the first two words of Gen. 19.34 are "vyihi mimmaħarath" which King James translates as "And it came to pass on the morrow." "mimmaħrath" according to Gesenius (who cites this verse) means on the morrow whereas for the general definition of "maħrath" he gives "morrow (the day following a past day). I translated "mimmaħrath" as “postridie mane.”

(I just noticed that I sanctified King James!) And ptolemyauletes is right indeed that the impersonal verbs "evenit ut" or "accidit" are more often seen than "factum est" but that doesn't mean "factum est" isn't good.

Sorry Adrianus, I just realised I had somehow missed your second post in this thread, where you had already suggested the suggestions I just gave.

The only thing we can guarantee when communicating via the internet is that we will be almost completely misunderstood, and likely cause great offence in doing so. Throw in an attempt at humour and you insure a lifelong enemy will be made.

But you did a good thing, because I accidentally wrote "accessit" not "accidit" above. I can't explain why, when "accidit" is so much used, but I did. So you corrected the mistake. Thanks. I'll correct above.